“I don’t like to get immunized,” Science-ish was surprised to hear from one of Canada’s most esteemed vaccine researchers this week. “I do, and I will continue, but I put it in the same category as going for a colonoscopy.”

With the re-emergence of diseases like measles and whooping cough, and parents increasingly seeking alternative vaccination schedules or opting out of shots all together, policymakers are scrambling to figure out what to do. In California, for example, the state legislature is now looking at a bill that would require parents who want to decline vaccines for their kids to seek counseling from a doctor.

Here in Canada, some hospitals have begun essentially forcing health-care workers to get the flu shot if they want to keep their jobs. We’ll never see that kind of measure applied to the general population, so for now: What do we know about what works when it comes to getting people to comply with vaccine guidelines?

Surprisingly little. Those who research these issues—including the vaccine-hating vaccinologist Dr. Andrew Potter—told Science-ish we have no good evidence on interventions that get refusers to change their minds. Part of the problem, of course, is that it would be difficult to find vaccine-shy people who would participate in a study on how to get them to enroll in an immunization program. The other issue, said Mayo Clinic infectious diseases expert Dr. Gregory Poland, is that vaccine denial “is a relatively new phenomenon.” Though there was opposition to vaccination in the 19th and 20th centuries, “From post-WWII up until about the early 1990s, no one really rejected vaccines.” So the science simply hasn’t caught up.

For now, we can run pilots, as California is thinking of doing, and see what works to boost coverage. But Dr. Poland, and others Science-ish spoke to, think a program like the Golden State’s is unlikely to improve uptake since it assumes more education will lead to better coverage. And we already know that’s not always the case. “People who make a decision to reject vaccines are making a decision based on anecdotes, misrepresentation, fear, and emotion,” he said, citing examples of communities like Vashon Island in Washingston State. There, despite the relatively high levels of education, access to health care, and wealth, large swathes of the population refuse to vaccinate their kids against childhood diseases.

Scientist and author Michael Shermer has coined a phrase for the kind of anecdote-driven decision-making that seems to shape choices like rejecting vaccines. He calls it belief-dependent realism. This is when people make decisions, and then accept or reject the evidence on a given issue based on whether it validates their decisions. That seems to be one reason why parents wind up exposing their children to the one in one thousand chance they will get a disease that would be managed with vaccination, instead of the one in ten million chance a vaccine could make them sick. (Science-ish won’t delve into already well-debunked vaccine myths, so see here or the open-access version here for a summary.)

“Both [getting vaccinated and refusing to do so] have a risk, both have a benefit. By reasoning, you’d see that the vaccine offers the most benefit and the least risk,” said Dr. Poland. Still, stirring, cherry-picked anecdotes of the very rare or non-existent side-effects of vaccines—spread by the likes of Playboy model Jenny McCarthy or the now-infamous researcher Andrew Wakefield—have a powerful hold on people’s minds. Education or good data may not necessarily have any impact on those folks.

However, Dr. Poland suggested, “One way to reach them is with emotional appeals.” When he confronts anti-vax parents at the Mayo Clinic, he brings out his own scary anecdotes: photos of babies with a particular vaccine-preventable disease, or video testimonials from parents who lost a child as a result of refusing to immunize. “It’s fighting emotion with emotion and it harkens to the fact that—if you’re somebody whose decision model is emotional—wisdom resides with me discussing this on the level at which you make decisions.”

Science-ish is a joint project of Maclean’s, the Medical Post and the McMaster Health Forum. Julia Belluz is the associate editor at the Medical Post. Got a tip? Seen something that’s Science-ish? Message her at julia.belluz@medicalpost.rogers.com or on Twitter @juliaoftoronto

Filed under:

Advertisement

About this author

Julia Belluz is a National Magazine Award-winning journalist covering health care and policy. A Knight Science Journalism Fellow at MIT, she writes the blog/column ‘Science-ish' for Maclean's and the Medical Post about the evidence behind the health headlines.

Advertisement

Post navigation

Fighting scary vaccine stories with scarier no-vaccine stories

I don’t know what’s being taught about Evolution in Canadian schools, but American states are busy trying to eliminate the topic from the classroom. They want to teach ‘creationism’ instead….and/or ‘let the kids decide’. Same with climate science…and of course, sex.

Even South Korea has abruptly pulled Evolution from the classroom as a result of a ‘christian’ campaign.

Given this huge urge to deny science and promote ‘faith’ in many areas, it’s no wonder we have people falling for the idea their kids don’t need vaccines.

Many people today have never seen polio or measles or dozens of other illnesses, and figure it’s quite safe to go about unprotected. So the photos showing parents what the illness involves is a good idea, and will hopefully be effective.

I used to vaccinate my kids. My son had regressed after his 16 month shots. I was told it was a coincidence and “autism”. Then my other son was vaccinated and he had seizures. I was told this is “normal”. That day he stopped responding to his name. So with science IGNORING parents and patients, what is to trust?

Also, immunity is based off of IgG antibodies. Those that get shingles and fifths disease have been known to have IgG antibodies to the viruses BEFORE, DURING and AFTER the outbreak. So is IgG really giving an “immunity”? I read a published study on the H1N1 vaccination. It is interesting that IgG and IgE were only found in the vaccinated. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21448311 This may be great…However, for those of you unaware, IgE is related to ALLERGIES and parasites. Have you ever stopped to think of how bad it would be if your body develops a severe allergy to a virus? It could probably do more harm than good. Did you know that you can develop an allergy to ANY contents in a vaccination? I don’t believe it is just “heavy metals” causing problems.Plus, did you know you can spread a vaccine virus? Maybe you believe you can’t, because that is what you are told. It isn’t true though. Polio is a good one to look at. You can shed the virus up to three months post vaccination. And it can mutate. How good do you think the vaccination will work then? Of course, there will be outbreaks and always will no matter the vaccination rate.

We are smart enough to realize that wide use of antibiotics can cause super bugs, but science hasn’t figured out that wide spread use of vaccines can do the same. First of all, some vaccinations contain antibiotics, but it is the mutation of viruses you should worry about (of course, unless you are allergic to the antibiotic already).

Do some more research and use your critical thinking skills. You might find that you will never get another vaccination or you may decide it is the best thing in the world. But don’t criticize us who choose not too. It is not some crazy fad or uneducated guess that I decided not too. I fully believe good hygiene is the best preventive measure when it comes to disease.

Normally, this is the part where i would cite actual science to persuade you of how wrong you are. However, there’s no help for you, so my best response to your “argument’ is this: You’re an idiot. And I really, really hope my calling you an idiot makes people read your links and realize just how idiotic your argument is.

I’ll admit, I’m kind of hoping against hope, but the best hope i have is that someone will read that stuff with at least a slightly skeptical eye…Trying to keep the stupid from spreading may be all we have left.

MostlyCivil on June 8, 2012 at 9:57 am

1. The narcolepsy was NOT LINKED to the H1N1 vaccine….rather they were INVESTIGATING whether or not there was a link.
2. The pertussis vaccine HAS NOT BEEN PULLED. There have been vaccine-resistant strains identified but healthcare officials are telling parents to VACCINATE THEIR BABIES because the vaccine will modify the severity of the whooping cough even if the babies get the disease….meaning they won’t get it as severely if they have been vaccinated.
3. How many women have been stricken with and died from cervical cancer? I’m sorry but you will have to provide better research than I site entitled “the truth about Gardasil”.
If you are going to misrepresent your research, why do you provide the links?

“How many women have been stricken with and died from cervical cancer?”

1. The weak between HPV and cervial cancer is far fetched.

2. The ability of the vaccine to prevent HPV remains unproven,

3. You line is fear mongerning, no less.

Vacunas Autismo on June 10, 2012 at 2:38 pm

This is when you lose all credibility. HPV is the accepted and ONLY cause of cervical cancer. It also causes penile cancer. By trying to deny this well known fact, you make everything else you claim, ridiculous.

Healthcare Insider on June 11, 2012 at 1:07 pm

The link between HPV and cancer is absolutely been observed. The vaccine provides immunity against the HPV strains it claims to. If you only have lies to back up your opinion, it is not very impressive.

Sullivanthepoop on June 25, 2012 at 7:31 am

…deleted

Vacunas Autismo on June 10, 2012 at 2:39 pm

“The narcolepsy was NOT LINKED to the H1N1 vaccine”

This is when you lose all credibility :-)

Get your facts strait before you post. narcolepsy was LINKED to the H1N1 and 3 kids have already been compensated for brain injury caused by Pandemrix.

R.K. on June 17, 2012 at 8:08 am

Its really astonishing how so many people just reflexively give a thumbs down to such a well reasoned, articulate comment, based on not one, but two direct personal experiences and a ton of research, and that provides multiple links to peer-reviewed scientific journal articles.

The analogy given in OE1’s rebuttal is not applicable whatsoever, yet I hear similar regurgitated drivel all the time. If you can’t come up with a better counter argument than “vaccines work because they do” or “vaccines don’t cause autism because so and so said they don’t”, don’t bother. Our society’s capacity for critical thought is hopefully at its nadir, because if it gets any lower we’re doomed.

For those of you that do have some capacity for critical thought and an adult level of reading comprehension, check out this link, which clearly shows that the sharp downward trend in the instance of viral diseases began long before vaccines were widely adpopted. All of the charts are based on official national statistics and references are provided. Its one thing to have varying opinions, but when new FACTS come to light, and you don’t at least question your previously-held opinions, you are being ideological, not logical or rational.

I think you should get this sentence made into a T-shirt:
“If you can’t come up with a better counter argument than “vaccines work because they do” ”
Yes. The best argumnent we have that vaccination works is…it works. Congratulations. You’ve found the ultimate weakness in our argument. We’re using facts.
Your cognitive dissonance renders you incapable of a rational argument.

Jim, I am sorry but “anon’s” has misrepresented what is in his “ton of research”. Researchers who tested the previously vaccinated children and found IgE and IgG antibodies were PLEASED because in their mind that showed the immunity had lasted 2 years. Anon is suggesting that the mere presence of IgE antibodies denotes an “allergic reaction”. However, IgE antibodies do more than spawn allergic reactions. They recognize “intruders” in the body. They are thought to attack parasites and cancer. He points out that people have IgG antibodies to shingles prior to getting the disease but does he not know that shingles is a latent form of the Epstein Barr virus (the same virus as chicken pox). You cannot get shingles unless you had chicken pox so it only makes sense that you would have some antibodies to the virus.

I’ve seen that bafflegab before. There’s reams of evidence from decades of research that says vaccines work; you’re going to now say it’s all coincidence? What a load!

Yes, there are risks with vaccines. There are greater risks, both personal and to society as a whole, to not vaccinating. If you want to play the odds, you get the vaccination. Otherwise, feel free to take the higher-odds bet; it’s your life. Literally. Or maybe that of a loved one, or a neighbour…

There is zero quality research comparing vaccinated and non-vaccinated cohorts and their relative risk of autism, seizure disorder etc. This research is possible because there are large numbers of non-vaccinated children. Why is it not being done? Have you considered the profit margin of big pharm vaccine producers? Even mainstream newspapers have reported that flu vaccines were not adequately studied before being publicly implemented. Manufacturer contracts with government Dept of Health must have been huge. We can see the role of big oil influencing government environmental impact assessments and subsequent quick approvals to drill or develop tar sand fields. This is just a cash issue. Go ahead. Look the other way.

Guest on June 10, 2012 at 5:11 am

Oh you are mistaken. After Dr. Wakefield FAKED his study linking vaccination to autism there were many studies done trying to replicate and validate his results but they all found there was NO EVIDENCE to support Dr. Wakefields contention that vaccination caused autism because he lied and fudged the results. As for studies on seizures and vaccination. There have been studies regarding whole-cell pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine and seizures. As a result of a higher than acceptable amount of adverse reactions (seizures) that vaccine was dropped in favor of the a-cellular pertussis vaccine at least 13 years ago in Canada. Now if you did your research you would know this and you wouldn’t be making these unsubstantiated and false claims.
As for the Canadian government not doing due diligence when it comes to vaccination, again you could not be more mistaken. Do you not recall them insisting on “in Canada” studies for the H1N1 vaccination even though internation “real time” studies proved it to be safe and effective?

Healthcare Insider on June 10, 2012 at 10:59 am

I recall 2 million vaccines being shipped to Canadian clinics before the H1N1 vaccine was even approved. I recall a ‘streamlined’ approval process to get a vaccine from development to delivery in 6 months. And I recall the WHO changing the definition of a pandemic, deleting the phrase ‘enormous numbers of deaths and illness’ from the criteria. H1N1 was a influenza virus rebranded as a freak killer resulting in 3 billion vaccines being distributed at $2 to $20 per dose depending on a country’s ability to pay.

“Key scientists advising the World Health Organization on planning for an
influenza pandemic had done paid work for pharmaceutical firms that
stood to gain from the guidance they were preparing. These conflicts of
interest have never been publicly disclosed by WHO, and WHO has
dismissed inquiries into its handling of the A/H1N1 pandemic as
“conspiracy theories.”
BMJ
2010;340:c2912

Guest on June 10, 2012 at 2:01 pm

OK, so even assuming there was a certain amount of underhanded inflating of need in this instance for profit (skeptical though I am), you would argue that this is grounds for writing off decades of proven positive life-saving (or quality of life preserving) vaccination results? That’s a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater if I’ve ever seen one.

There is not a medication or medical procedure out there that doesn’t pose a risk for some percentage of the population. Why don’t we just close the hospitals and burn doctors and nurses for the witches they are?

KeithBram on June 10, 2012 at 2:51 pm

There was no inflating of the need for profit, only gardasil has proven profitable and still not as profitable as common generic daily drugs.

Guest on June 25, 2012 at 7:36 am

I was talking about a “real time” study that showed it was save to give the vaccine with the adjuvant (which was squalene, not aluminum) to pregnant women. Canada suspended producing the vaccine with the adjuvant in favor of producing the vaccine without the adjuvant until it could do its own safety studies. Canada had ALREADY done safety studies on the general public.

Healthcare Insider on June 11, 2012 at 2:36 pm

That is because it is a flu shot with a different strain. Flu shots had already been approved.

Momof3 on June 25, 2012 at 7:34 am

“…there was NO EVIDENCE to support Dr. Wakefields contention that vaccination caused autism…”

You’re stuck in the ’90s, who would trust his hchildren’s health to a doctor so out of touch with research?

Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?

Source: Neural Dynamics Research Group, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of British Columbia, Canada.

“… … The application of the Hill’s criteria to these data indicates that the correlation between Aluminium in vaccines and Autism spectrum disorders may be causal. Because children represent a fraction of the population most at risk for complications following exposure to Al, a more rigorous evaluation of Al adjuvant safety seems warranted…”

Vacunas Autismo on June 10, 2012 at 2:54 pm

Oh yes I read the study…they are investigating a POSSIBLE LINK but they would never be so dense as to say emphatically there is a causal relationship because the truth is that according to the CDC, “aluminum is the water we drink and the food we eat”. Yes, a baby will get 4 miligrams of aluminum from all their vaccinations and 10 miligrams from breastmilk and 40 miligrams from formula should the mother decide not to breastfeed….so tell me, how can anyone say that the 4 miligrams that come from vaccination are more responsible for any supposed harm to a baby than the 40 miligrams that come from formula? Maybe instead of beating the anti-vaccine drum, you should be beating the pro-breastfeeding drum.
Further, have you not read the recent studies linking autism to obesity in pregnancy….better to start beating that drum too.

Healthcare Insider on June 11, 2012 at 2:32 pm

Dr. Wakefield “faked” nothing. An Italian court has recently found in favour of a vaccine-injured child in just such a case. Dr. Wakefield is presently suing the BMJ (British Medical Journal) and Brian Deer, the “journalist” who attempted to make a name for himself by trying to vilify Wakefield’s research.
Most of the pertussis cases being reported these days are in highly vaccinated populations, and there is a high incidence of para-pertussis which is actually a form of pertussis that has been created by the vaccine you’re so fond of hyping.
Just admit that you’re one of those social marketers hired by pharma companies to defend their products. Nobody else on an open blog would be so vociferous about defending the drug companies as some sort of philanthropic interest when they outearn all the other Fortune 500 companies combined.

lauriej1 on June 29, 2012 at 8:51 pm

“…here’s reams of evidence from decades of research that says vaccines
work; you’re going to now say it’s all coincidence? What a load!…”

Vaccines don’t work, their efficacy is never assessed with clinical endpoints but with surrogate ones, like the presence of antibodies. Whether they are protective or just heterophilic (coadjuvant induced), is unknown:

“…It is known that, in many instances, antigen-specific antibody titers do not correlate with protection.
In addition, very little is known on parameters of cell-mediated
immunity which could be considered as surrogates of protection….“… immunological correlates of protection are largely unknown for many infectious diseases… the immunological mechanisms of vaccine-induced protection remain unknown… whenever correlates of protection have been proposed, they only refer to serum antibody titers… there is complete lack of any parameter of cellular-mediated immunity known to correlate with protection… it is crucial to extend studies in the attempt to define correlates of protection for the most important vaccine targets… “
False Hyperthyrotropinemia Induced by Heterophilic Antibodies against Rabbit Serumhttp://jcem.endojournals.org/content/53/1/200.abstract?ijkey=7fb4f0ef89291213aa95c413924c3201f185f240&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

So smallpox just happened to go away on its own after eons? And its disappearance just happened to coincide with the worldwide vaccination program?

… just to name one example.

Like any drug, some types of vaccination work better – and longer – than others.

Vaccinations are aimed at highly communicable diseases that are very dangerous to a high percentage of the population. They have been shown to work. Just because scientists still debate how to measure their efficacy is not a valid argument to their not working. That’s like saying cellphones don’t work because physicists have yet to reconcile the differences between Einstein’s theory and quantum theory.

Present a convincing argument that the eradication of smallpox and the dramatic worldwide reduction of polio and a whole raft of childhood diseases merely coincided in every case with the introduction of a vaccine for that disease or refrain from spouting such nonsense as “vaccines don’t work”.

KeithBram on June 10, 2012 at 3:50 pm

“…So smallpox just happened to go away on its own after eons? And its
disappearance just happened to coincide with the worldwide vaccination
program?…”

1. Smallpox vaccination took place in a past where no scientific clinical trials were done or published. What we know about it does not come from science, but from unreliable sources such as chronicles and history books.

If we revise those history books and chronicles we find observations from doctors and reporters of the tiem, such as these.
“Supposing that the mortality from small-pox decreased from 502 in
the decade 1771-80 to 204 in the decade 1801-10, because of the
introduction of vaccination, how is it that nearly two centuries before its introduction, the death-rate of small-pox was only 189……. ? From 1796 to 1825 there was not any epidemic of small-pox in London.”—Dr. Charles T. Pearce, M.D. [1868 Book: Essay on Vaccination]

“Three children, all of the same parents, aged respectively 3, 6, and 7 months, ‘all died of “diarrhoea after vaccination.”
In these cases the small-pox virus invaccinated was driven upon the
intestines, and produced “diarrhoea” and death. In the latter cases the
invaccinated virus produced its like in another form, i.e, the
small-pox. Deaths from “diarrhoea” after “vaccination” may be counted by their “tens of thousands.”—JNO. PICKERING, F.S.S., F.R.G.S. [1876. THE STATISTICS OF THE MEDICAL OFFICERS TO THE LEEDS SMALL-POX HOSPITAL EXPOSED AND REFUTED]

“The
increased deaths from these five causes, from 1855 to 1880, exceed the
total deaths from Small-pox during the same period! So that even if the
latter disease had been totally abolished by vaccination, the general
mortality would have been increased, and there is much reason to believe that the increase may have been caused by vaccination itself.”–Wallace – 1889

“In
1871-2—thirty-five years after this Compulsory Vaccination Act—came the
terrible epidemic which swept all over Europe. It came to Prussia, and
what was the result? In that year small-pox carried off no less than 124,978 of her vaccinated and re-vaccinated citizens after thirty-five years of compulsory vaccination of the description which I have referred to!”–Dr Hadwen MD
(The Case Against Vaccination —an address at Gloucester on Saturday,
January 25th, 1896, during the Gloucester Smallpox Epidemic)

Is
it not, therefore, rather strange, Mr. President, that vaccination
should be reported as so utterly harmless in the distant Philippines,
where we can not easily get at the records, when we know it is so deadly
in the nearby England and America, where the accessible records show
that it causes, frequently, more deaths than smallpox, as I have already
proved? For example: the great English Commission on
Vaccination found that deaths from vaccination were sometimes as high as
seventy deaths per million vaccinated. This is twice as high as the
mortality from smallpox in the United States, which for five
years, from 1901 to 1905, including our last great epidemic period of
1901 and 1902, averaged only thirty-four deaths per million population! [1920 USA] HORRORS OF VACCINATION EXPOSED AND ILLUSTRATED BY CHAS. M. HIGGINS

“At
present, intelligent people do not have their children vaccinated, nor
does the law now compel them to. The result is not, as the Jennerians
prophesied, the extermination of the human race by smallpox; on the
contrary more people are now killed by vaccination than by smallpox.”—George Bernard Shaw 1929

“I have had in my own experience one very small epidemic comprising 33 (smallpox) cases of which 29 had vaccination histories and a good scar, and some of them vaccinated within the last year. There was no protection there. “—Dr. William Howard Hay – 1937

“Within my long lifetime, its ruthless enforcement throughout Europe [la vacunación] ended in two of the worst epidemics of smallpox in record, our former more dreaded typhus and cholera epidemics having meanwhile been ended by sanitation. After that failure, the credit of vaccination was saved for a while by the introduction of isolation, which at once produced improved figures.”—George Bernard Shaw (August 9, 1944, the Irish Times)

1738:
“Small pox epidemic in South Carolina. Dr. James Kilpatrick introduces variolation (small pox innoculation) with success: only 4% of the people innoculated died. Of 1,675 infected naturally, 295 died. of 437 innoculated, 16 died. The population of Charleston was approximately 5,000 in 1738; Almost half were infected’ From Duffy, Epidemics in colonial America, 1953 pp82-83 (2).”
1796:
Edwin Jenner finds that cowpox vaccination will protect against small pox more safely than live small pox vaccination.
1972:
Last outbreak of small pox in Yugoslavia. 175 people infected naturally, 35 died. Mass campaign undertaken to vaccinate and re-vaccinate peple in area.
–BBC–History: “Small Pox: Eradicating the Scourage”.
Your so-called “vaccination inquirer” obviously paid NO attention to people in the horn of Arica or other developing countries that were dying of small pox because even in 1950, two million people per year were DYING of small pox. As for these deaths you have attributed to the vaccine……”20 deaths were attributed to the vaccine but none to small pox”….are you suggesting that they should have stopped vaccinating because the vaccination campaign was obviously so successful as that point?
If you are really interested in what a failure to eradicate an illness does to a society, you should check out the history of Malaria. We eradicated in our part of the world but sadly left it to wreak havoc in Africa. It is killing many young men there and now the disease has become treatment resistent.

Healthcare Insider on June 11, 2012 at 2:10 pm

>>the dramatic worldwide reduction of polio

Polio was “erradicated” by virtue of a restricion of its definition shortly after the introduction of the vaccine.

Short explanation:

The trick: Polio isnß t erradicated at all, only its definition has been restricted.

Until 1954 – before the vaccine – “polio” was the name of 11 conditions with different causes that persists today under the generic name “Flaccid paralysis” (11 different causes, one of them poliovirus),

In the early 60’s the name “polio” was restricted to paralysis where poliovirus could be found.

Toda, all the illnesses that were called “polio” until 1954 persist and are on teh increase, under the guise of “Flaccid paralysis”.

WHO definition prior to 1954:

“…Signs and symptoms of nonparalytic poliomyelitis with the addition of partial or complete paralysis of one or more muscle groups, detected on two examinations at least 24 hours apart.”
Today, “polio” is much more restrictive:

“..Paralytic poliomyelitis may be clinically suspected in individuals experiencing acute onset of flaccid paralysis that cannot be attributed to another apparent cause. A laboratory diagnosis is usually made based on recovery of pliovirus from a stool sample or a swab…”

This manoeuver was already transparent and exposed to the intellectuals of the time:

“Thus, simply by changes in diagnostic criteria, the number of paralytic cases was predetermined to decrease in 1955-1957, whether or not any vaccine was used.”

“…Its really astonishing how so many people just reflexively give a thumbs
down to such a well reasoned, articulate comment, based on not one, but
two direct personal experiences and a ton of research, and that
provides multiple links to peer-reviewed scientific journal articles…”

It doesn’ mater how many peer reviewed articles you can pull, the only scientific evidence for a vaccine is a controlled placebo study (vaccine vs non-vaccine) with clinical, not surrogate, endpoints. No such studies exist. Vaccine marketing is based on assumptions that favour commercial interests, not scientific proof.

What you are really asking for are CHALLENGE STUDIES, and no, none have been done. So until we can actually see results of a vaccinated versus unvaccinated population directly exposed to a known virus, we have no real way of knowing whether vaccines actually IMMUNIZE any living organism from contagious disease.
Antibodies are proof of exposure, not proof of immunity. Memory cells can indicate proof if immunity, but there is currently no medical test that can show the existence or extent of memory cells.
The whole argument in favour of vaccination is based on conjecture and marketing hype.

Now if you are going to encourage people to do their research, the least you can do is provide them with accurate information. You gave us no information about your son’s seizure. Was it a febrile seizure, caused by a high fever? Second, you point out polio as a vaccine that sheds, yet you fail to point out that the “oral” polio vaccine that sheds in fecal matter is not even administered in North America or in most developing countries. The killed injectable vaccine that is used here DOES NOT SHED and there is no risk of passing the virus through vaccination.
Further the risk of getting polio related to the oral polio vaccine in developing countries is about 1 in 750,000. Meanwhile, do you know how many people have died or been stricken by this disease? Also, do you know how far the rates have fallen due to the availability of a vaccine?
As for your assertion that hygiene is the best preventative measure when it comes to disease, do you really belief HIV will be erradicated in Africa if people practice good handwashing? Don’t get me wrong, I am a big advocate for good hygiene but I will support Bill Gate’s plan to vaccinate all developing countries because it is based on good science.

That’s what happened with my first child also at 16 months. I didn’t tie it to immunisation at that point. 2nd child (6 weeks) went from rolling, smiling etc to floppy and later being diagnosed with CP, 3rd child died. What is interesting is all also had experienced some form of viral infection (rsv) within a two week period of the immunization. The most frustrating thing is that these events are not recorded, and individually parents are ignored and humiliated for asking questions. Then they wonder why we don’t trust them…. While self reports are not as reliable as other forms of data collection, this type of qualitative information, if there was a repository kept, could perhaps inform further quantitative research.

You state that : ”
these events are not recorded, and individually parents are ignored and ***humiliated*** for asking questions”. I am sorry to see that you even got minus points for your comments. If people in this site give you bad points, it means that they don’t care about the safety of our children.

Dear Anon, please don’t listen to some of these comments that people have made. I know how hard it must have been to have two of your children have reactions to a vaccine that you were told would have protected them. In a sense, these people are saying that because your children took the hit and to them it’s ok because it’s a greater good for the whole of society. How can anyone say that when your world was turned upside down. My brother had a terrible reaction to a measles vaccine when he was 3 or 4 years of age. Within 2 weeks of the immunization he lost his speech and eventually was diagnosed with autism. how can anyone explain how a perfectly healthy child can go from smiling and talking to a mentally disabled person within weeks. My parents endeavoured to find out why and approached a group with similar experiences with their children and vaccines. The fact is that vaccines are not safe and they have attributed to a rise in autism, especially amungst boys. the government and big pharmaceutical companies do take on cases of adverse reactions, which there are thousands of every year and settle them quietly behind closed doors, then they have parents and all parties involved sign a confidentiality agreement to never bring it up again. The fact is that bad things do happen because of vaccinations and there has never been a long term study conducted with sound results that can say otherwise. facts are that due to our cleaner lifestyles, more education and better sanitation, diseases have been on a decline BEFORE the intruduction of widespread vaccination. Science is not perfect, why should anyone be using their kids as a science experiment in the name of public safety?

Cake – Haemphilus influenzae type B (HiB) used to cause epiglottitis (swelling and lbockage of the airway) and meningitis in children. Vaccination against HiB only started in the 1980’s, and this infection has virtually disappeared from our societies. There has been no change in lifestyle or sanitation in wealthy societies since the 1980’s. The vaccine has eliminated the disease.

This is my area of expertise and everything you just said about antibodies is false. IgG is the most common antibody made against pathogens because it has such a large area of circulation. IgA is for mucosae and IgE is for parasites and is also the most common antibody associated with allergies. Most vaccines stimulate an IgG response. Oral polio stimulates an IgA response. No vaccines stimulate an IgE response. A person can be pretty much healthy and not be able to make IgA antibodies because other antibodies can take its place. A person with no IgG antibodies is severely immunocomprimised. Though live attenuated viruses, like the oral polio vaccine, can be shed and in rare circumstances that virus can mutate back to the pathogenic form, it has never been shown that live attenuated vaccines mutate at a faster rate than wild type viruses and has actually been shown that they mutate at a much slower rate. If the virus is shed in its attenuated form then that will actually give some immunity to the people who come in contact with it even if they are not vaccinated. If the rate of immunization is high enough for herd immunity there is no danger from the mutated form of the virus because it is the wild type form. It is good to educate yourself, but does little good if you do not understand what you are reading. That goes back to the uneducated choice.

Anon, I’m sorry that you are having to cope with illness and disability in your children, but developmental regression doesn’t happen overnight.
Current research on autism suggests that it may start in utero, and that early signs can be seen much younger than previously thought.
Children struglling with disability have enough going on in their lives – why subject them to the risk of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases as well?

Vaccines fail about 15% of the time so they typically provide immunity 85% of the time. The first varicella shot (chicken pox) has a good response between 70 and 90% of the time. The ONLY vaccines that last two years are flu vaccines. Once full immunity is accomplished, vaccines can provide up to 20 years or more. Even when a vaccine doesn’t provide total coverage and a person gets sick, they still get a much less severe form of the illness than they would have gotten without having received the vaccine.

Well, influenza is different than the things I posted above. It has several antigens on its surface that is recognized by our immune system and activates antibodies. Both the vaccine and wild type pathogen create long term immunity by producing memory B cells and the T cells that activate them. The problem is that the antigens mutate little by little, so if your immune system ‘sees’ the exact same strain you are immune. If there is one or two antigens different you will get a very mild illness. Once a certain number changes, you actually get a worse illness than the original flu because your immune system recognizes it and activates the same response, but there are not enough antibodies to do the job effectively and until all the antigens are different again no new antibodies will be made. So, still the vaccine is as good as the wild type infection, the virus has mutated in such a way that it can escape our defenses.

Momof3 on June 25, 2012 at 8:01 am

This is so not true. All long-term immunity comes from the production memory cells. You need both memory T cells and memory B cells for very long-term immunity. B cells secrete antibodies and T cells are needed to activate them. Natural immunity and immunization immunity that can produce both memory T cells and memory B cells produce the exact same immunity. Some immunizations only create long lived B cells. They do not last as long because they cannot become inactive and then be activated again and only last for 2-5 years. Some adjuvants as well as tetanus toxin can be added (the tetanus toxin is conjugated) to vaccinations to activate a T cell response. These vaccines are more likely to have side effects because T cells secrete molecules that activate inflammation. Some memory cells last for your entire life, some only last years. A vaccination for a pathogen that causes the creation of memory cells that last for 10 years, is going to protect you for 10 years. If you get the pathogen naturally, it will give you protective immunity for 10 years. Is that clear enough?

Yes, but you need at least a certain percentage for this to be true. The percentage varies dependent on the pathology of the particular disease. The concern these days is that so many people are deferring their shots that the “herd effect” is being lost and people (such as very young babies or very old people or those with certain conditions that preclude their ability to get a vaccine) are being put at increased risk.

At last count there were 242 peer reviewed clinical studies that confirmed the dangers of vaccines.

The USA even has its own Vaccine Injury Court to deal with law suits from vaccinations.

Fluvax itself lists right in the packaging that there is NO clinical evidence that it prevents or lessens the duration of the flu. But this is FDA and Health Canada Approved, never tested prior to sale and the manufacturers are granted amnesty against law suits when the harm or kill people with their untested vaccines.

Dr Oz, who in my opinion is a total fake and sell out, also owns a large stake in a Vaccine Manufacturing Business, he gets on his show and tells the world that everyone needs vaccines and fear mongers, then admits that he does not give it to his own children.

I sat in a hospital emergency room when the world was being vaccinated against H1N1 and it looked like a war zone of sick children laying all over the place throwing up everywhere, soaked in their own sweat and to sick to move.

You know what every single one of them were told? To go home, that it was just a side effect of the H1N1 Vaccine.

They have tried fear mongering and that did not work, now they will be trying to question your intelligence to see if that motivates you!

These are antics used by people who can provide no proof, clinical or otherwise against the masses that are refusing them. When presented with the fact and documented proof the best that they can muster is to question our intelligence!

lol .. yes folks, just take their word for it or you are a dummy :) Hilarious!

So, If i produce scientific evidence, you say the scientists are corrupt. It’s agreat tactic, because it means I can’t use facts to argue my point. It also makes you look like a conspiracy theorist. So, either it’s a worldwide, massive conspiracy involving millions of docs, scientists, nurses, pharma corps and governments…or you’re just stupid. I know where my bet goes,

Vaccines are not profitable. Now granted if I came out with a certain new vaccine, I might win a 4 million dollar tax free Nobel prize and get $120,000 for the patent from a pharmaceutical company, but how often does the first one happen? If I invented a new cancer drug or a daily drug treatment the reimbursement for the rights would increase to the millions. Vaccines are not very profitable. Working with viruses takes extraordinarily expensive labs, very expensive reagents, and very expensive safety equipment. A lot of it goes to waste because viruses are touchy and even if you do everything right, at least 1/4 of all your samples will be bad. A lot of viruses have RNA genomes and RNA is notoriously hard to work with and requires even more expensive reagents than viruses and has an even greater rate of bad samples. Vaccines are expensive to produce and store, their price is much lower than most drugs and treatments, and people only buy 1-3 doses usually. That is why most research into new vaccines is not done by pharmaceutical companies and they don’t pay much for the patent rights. Gardasil has been more profitable and I am not sure of the logistics of that.

Dr. Oz’s wife is a Reiki practioner. She probably made him agree not to vaccinate the kids, however, in his role as a medical physician he knows that science supports the efficacy and safety of vaccination. As for your bs story about being surrounded by sick children DUE to side effects from the h1n1 vaccine, that is just ridiculous. The truth of the matter is that the vaccine was late in coming out and most people already had the flu before the vaccine could be of help. The real problem in the hospitals was an influx of people sick with the h1n1 flu. They ran out of ventilators for goodness sakes.
All the doctors in the major city hospital I worked at lined up and got the shot, especially those working in ICU and the ER. They saw first hand how sick people were. We had very few people who suffered from anything but mild side-effects from the vaccine.
You should check out how many babies have died in California in the last few years from whooping cough. It isn’t fear mongering, it is a fact.

I was a little disappointed that both Julia and the scientists quoted ducked one of the important issues associated with vaccines, namely that in many cases the bulk of the benefits do not go to the individual vaccinated.

1) wrt the flu vaccine, as a healthy, youngish person my risk is missing a week of work. I am not self employed, so my income would not change.
The real benefits to the annual flu program is to persons with weakened immune systems and to the overall economy due to reduced lost time. Of course, if the economy is better, I presumable benefit but the linkage is very indirect.

2) wrt diseases that have been virtually wiped out by vaccination; the first person who refuses vaccination really is not at risk and indeed benefits from avoiding the hassle and perceived risks of the vaccination. Of course, if enough people refuse vaccination the disease returns and there is some direct benefit to the individual. Still the dominant benefit is shared by the entire population.

I agree that motivating individuals towards behaviours that contribute to the general good is important, but it won’t happen if you don’t address the real issue, which this article don’t.

Of course every vaccine carries risks. There are risks dependent on the type of vaccine, there are risks dependent on the age and health status of certain individuals, there are risks in regards to the shots themselves etc etc.
It’s not a question of whether vaccines carry risk but rather the fact that the diseases in question carry so much more risk than the vaccines.
I’m guessing that the same people who can’t see a difference between a 1/1000 risk of getting a disease versus a 1/10 000 000 of having a reaction to a vaccine, are the same people who play the lottery and expect to win?
As Steward Smith rightly points out as well, the failure to immunize a sufficient proportion of the population also carries risks for others, especially those who can’t get vaccines for basic health reasons related to age and health profiles that preclude the ability to get a vaccine.
Considering all this, I think it’s highly irresponsible for people healthy enough to get a vaccine, to fail to do so. You’re miscalculating the risk to yourself and everyone else for that matter.

“…In our opinion, the possibility that vaccine benefits may have been
overrated and the risk of potential adverse effects underestimated, has
not been rigorously evaluated in the medical and scientific community.
We hope that the present paper will provide a framework for a much
needed and long overdue assessment of this highly contentious medical
issue….”

Such is the reality regarding vaccination. Under these pitiful conditions no meaningful assessment of risk vs. benefit is possible. The only reasonable position is to reject a medical (mal)practive that’s heavily monopolized by an industry with obvious conflict of interests.

I think its highly irresponsible to promote one size fits all vaccines to people that are predisposed to vaccine injury, so with that said will you be taking care of all the vaccine injured children? I don’t think you will, so with that said I suggest you inject your family with the toxins and quit promoting them to the general public, since you will do nothing for them other than run your mouth and recommend more toxic vaccines blindly, its just insane that someone would come on here and suggest something that might cause harm to someone else!

When the vaccine manufacturers can provide challenge studies of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated groups THEN we will have actual evidence that they can actually prevent
disease. Until then, there is no real scientific evidence that vaccines do what’s claimed.
For now it’s prudent to forego the hype and the potential risks for what are generally short, self-limiting diseases with a relatively small risk of serious consequences.
The only cases of Polio since the 1980’s have been caused by the vaccine. The largest measles and whooping cough outbreaks in the last few years have been in the over 90 per cent vaccinated groups.
Who’s kidding who?
This blog has nothing to do with protecting the public but rather reinforcing the medical/chemical industries.

Suppose you prove it’s false since you’d like to opine otherwise but haven’t posted any proof of any of your opinions here or elsewhere. The info. is readily available on the web so do your own homework rather than just buying the usual for-the-public propaganda, or this article that references no research.

The web???? Let me guess on anti-vaccination sites.
Let me ask you lauriej, were you vaccinated as a child? If so, what terrible effects did it have on you?
As you for suggestion that the only cases of polio have been caused by vaccination, that is patently false. Do you have any idea how many individuals in developing countries have been stricken and died from this disease, many who had no access to vaccine. I would advise you to look it up but I know you will only believe what you want to.
As for whooping cough, almost a 1000 children were ill with it in California in 2009 and 5 babies died. They were not vaccinated. You won’t look up but another people who read this blog will. I myself had a child who had whooping cough prior to getting her 2 month vaccination. Her sibling who was fully vaccinated did not get the illness.

FYI the National Vaccine Information Centre is NOT an “anti-vaccination site”, just as an example. I just love the way vaccine pimps love to categorize unbiased cautionary information as being “anti-vax”… Talk about a propaganda campaign.
Yup, I was vaccinated against chicken pox and measles… and guess what? I got them both anyway. So did all of the rest of the kids I knew. It’s not a case of “terrible effects”, it’s a case of pushing useless crap on unsuspecting people based on some authority pronouncement of the good it’s supposed to do financed by tax dollars and the potential risks that are far worse than just getting what is usually a nuisance disease. The risks of serious complications from the disease isn’t worth the cost, or the risks of adverse reactions, not to mention that when the body is forced to deal naturally with a challenge it strengthens the immune system — not assaults that weaken it like vaccines do. And just where do you think all those “idiopathic” chronic immune diseases like Lupus etc. come from, hmmm? Those vaccines do actual DNA damage and epigenetic damage that manifests later in life and onto future generations.
There are two issues involved in contracting a disease — exposure and susceptibility. One won’t contract a disease if one isn’t exposed to it, and won’t contract it if they are not/less susceptible. Mass vaccination just bypasses those two issues.
Moreover, circulating antibodies are just proof of exposure, not proof of immunity. Only memory cells are proof of immunity and there is no current way to test for those. My homework goes way beyond yours.
Whooping cough? Try Homeopathic Drosera in a 200C. It also works for Kennel Cough. $5 worth will treat a whole city.
Now readers can try out this alternative for themselves.

lauriej1 on June 10, 2012 at 1:03 pm

You’re advocating homeopathic medicines? Talk about “pushing useless crap on unsuspecting people based on some authority pronouncement of the good it’s supposed to do.” Different authority; way less evidence.

Yes, I think I did when I entered the evidenced of the outbreak of small pox in Charleston in 1738 where a small pox vaccine was used with great success. I think that is 270 odd years worth of evidence.

Healthcare Insider on June 11, 2012 at 3:17 pm

You will also find evidence that those smallpox vaccines gave the recipients smallpox and created even larger outbreaks in areas where they were used.
The only recorded cases of Polio since the 1980’s have been caused by the vaccine.
During the Flu pandemic of the early 1900’s patients who went to conventional hospitals suffered about a 30% mortality rate, compared to the 3 or 4% at Homeopathic hospitals.

lauriej1 on June 11, 2012 at 3:40 pm

lauriej1, I’m sorry but you really need to look at the stats from developing countries regarding polio. Your information is wrong. As for evidence that the smallpox vaccine gave people smallpox, you will have to provide real research findings for that. You are likely right about people dying in hospital of Spanish influenza but that has nothing to do with vaccine as there was no vaccine for that virus.

Healthcare Insider on June 11, 2012 at 11:29 pm

Circulating vaccine-derived polio virus. Look it up. You have not provided any evidence to back up your opinion, you’re simply relying on age-old vaccine industry propaganda. I’m not here to do your homework for you. Bottom line, you go right ahead and allow yourself to be vaccinated with whatever you like. You are not entitled to dictate to others regarding their choices or malign them.
And my age is NYOB. Suppose you tell me how much money you have in the bank.

lauriej1 on June 12, 2012 at 5:51 am

Oh I did look it up lauriej. I looked up the incidence of vaccination for polio in developing countries, the resulting DROP in the number of incidence of polio (down from 350,000 cases of polio per year prior to vaccinating to 35,0000 after vaccinating was initiated) and found statistics regading the ACTUAL numbers of cases where the live polio vaccine shed in feces is believed to have caused polio… (1 in 750,000 vaccinations) in fact. The problem is NONE of your claims match the research I found. My research was all gathered on government web sites including the Centres for Disease Control. It would be really easy if I was reading “age-old vaccine industry propaganda” but I am not. I am getting information from the health departments of governments. I am guessing you might not find those credible though…like David Suzuki said, you think your government and scientists want to hurt you.
As for your age….I am not the one who CLAIMED to have had a failed chicken pox and measles vaccine…you are. Obviously I didn’t need you to do my homework for me when I confronted you with the simple fact that the only way “you and your friends” could have received the chicken pox vaccine is if the bunch of you are teenagers…17 years old or younger.
As for my bank account, it isn’t impressive but Bill Gates is and he and his foundation are going to vaccinate the whole third world. I already have been vaccinated with everything I can be vaccinated with. I am a healthcare provider. It is actually my job to educate people as to the scientfiic truth related to health concerns including immunization. I should keep myself silent while you and a bunch of people who were all immunized as children with no terrible side-effects to themselves to report, go online and make suppositions and claims about the dangers and lack of efficacy of immunization. I should keep my mouth shut but you should continue to spew misinformation….no way!

Healthcare Insider on June 13, 2012 at 8:56 pm

Live attenuated virus vaccines like the oral polio vaccine do cause shedding of virus particles. If the virus particle is the attenuated virus then that will provide protection to the people who come into contact with it if they are not vaccinated. If in the 0.001% of cases the virus has reverted to the wild type pathogenic virus then a person who is not vaccinated against the virus would be in danger. That is another reason to keep vaccination rates high.

Momof3 on June 25, 2012 at 8:26 am

There is no justification for “keep(ing) vaccination rates high” unless you blindly believe the vaccine manufacturers’ ad-copy.
Bottom line is that virus particles are not really “live” or “dead” despite what’s claimed. Both have no biological effect until they’re injected into a host. What follows is a crap-shoot with no studies to show what the potential detriment may be. Assuming that people will be exposed to the virus and assuming what they’re susceptibility will be is still an unpredictable guesstimate. No science here, folks. Just propaganda to sell vaccines.

lauriej1 on June 29, 2012 at 8:41 pm

You cannot get smallpox from vaccinia. That doesn’t even make any sense.

Guest on June 25, 2012 at 8:22 am

Unless you are 17 or younger, there was no chicken pox vaccine when you grew up….and now you are going to treat babies with something you use to treat dogs with kennel cough?

Healthcare Insider on June 11, 2012 at 3:13 pm

There are plenty of pharma drugs that are not only used on humans, d’oh. Why would Homeopathy be any different, hmmm? And no toxic effects.
Talk to some mothers who are using Homeopathy for their families, including Dr. Oz’s wife. There are plenty of books at Amazon, study groups, online courses… Cuba has been using Homeopathy to prevent annual Leptospirosis outbreaks for the past few years at 1/10 of the cost of conventional vaccines and have eliminated most hospitalizations/mortalities from the disease. Oh, and dogs get Lepto too.

lauriej1 on June 11, 2012 at 3:28 pm

lauriej1, are you avoiding my question about your age or are you just being dishonest about receiving the chicken pox (varicella) vaccination as a child? Now that you realize that the vaccine was not released until 1995, you know that you have to admit that you lied about getting it OR you have to admit that you are 17 years old or younger….which is it?

Healthcare Insider on June 11, 2012 at 11:34 pm

FYI…The National Vaccination Centre’s sole goal is to prove that vaccines are unsafe and stop the government from vaccinating children. It was started by parents who “believe” their chidlren were harmed by a vaccine.

Healthcare Insider on June 13, 2012 at 11:39 pm

Just because you get a vaccine, it does not mean you will produce the correct or intended immune response to it. Vaccines carry a high risk, and severe consequences when they don’t work out as intended. Our bodies are bombarded every day with more and more chemicals, that affect the endocrine and immune systems. Having a vaccine in this case, is even riskier and can be very traumatic for the immune system. Whether to get vaccinated or not depends on the individual as it is they that will be carrying the consequences for the rest of their lives. Coercive tactics and scare tactics do nothing to minimize the risk to the individual. It’s certainly not your government who will take care of you, or take responsibility for a vaccine they forced upon you that didn’t work out.

For one thing vaccines do not carry a high risk. For another thing our immune systems have an infinite ability to produce antibodies to fight disease. A vaccine carries a piece of a virus which encourages the immune system to produce antibodies to the virus so if we encounter the whole live virus in the future, our immune system will mount a fight to kill the virus before it infects us. If having a vaccine is “traumatic” to our immune system, what is it like when our immune system encounters a real live virus??? Wow, the trauma must be fantastic in scope. The truth of the matter is that our immune system encounters invaders everyday, including cancers which it erradicates as part of its routine operations. Only when our immune system fails is there an issue. What I find funny about all these claims is that I will bet that you and all these people who are making ridiculous claims have themselves been vaccinated as children. I have yet to hear one of you tell of your own personal “trauma” as a result of your parent’s choice to have you vaccinated and yet you all will choose to deny your children the security of vaccination. Amazing!

And I think therein lays your problem… “making ridiculous claims”. Don’t try to fight fire with fire by falling back on the insults and ridicule. We who are passionate about it (and I’m not anti-immunization – I’m just pro decent research) are quite accustomed to this. Until we’ve been heard we will keep trying to find answers. Try to put it out with water instead. If you’re truly a health insider start working out how to effectively “listen” to what is being said. There’s a heck of a lot of mistrust out here. Why? And also try to understand the psychology of risk and of how risk is perceived, this approach from yourself and other practitioners just reinforces the views you are trying to eradicate. Good luck with that..

I am sorry but I had a child very ill with whooping cough before she was old enough to be vaccinated (prior to 2 months of age). I have very strong knowledge of human anatomy and physiology and on the science relating to vaccination. It is really difficult for me when people make claims that are not accurate in hopes of leading people to believe what they believe. I am all for making research-based decisions.
David Suzuki made a very good point when he asked people who were so skeptical about vaccination why they think their government, scientists and physicians want to hurt them. People allow their paranoia to color their ability to trust their physicians yet who do they go to when their appendix burst?

As some one who apparently had the H1N1 flu, recovered from the flu symptoms after a couple weeks and then suffered more than six months of chronic fatigue and overall physical weakness, I would gladly have taken a vaccine that could have prevented my suffering and subsequent lingering health effects. (I say apparently because I live in Canada and the doctor in the emegency room said they would only administer the test to confirm H1N1 to seniors and infants; since I was in neither group, they presumed my symptoms matched H1N1 and based my diagnosis on this).

This article makes me angry and just goes to show the futility experienced by those impacted by the debate but ignored because the key stakeholders are busily strutting their arrogant stuff. The article says that they can’t get immunization deniers to participate in programs to increase enrollment in immunisation. I think that would be logical – address the reasons why we won’t engage ourselves first and then we’ll let you know if it was sufficient to change our mind. That would require looking at the science. They have assumed that all decisions against are based on anecdotes, fear etc. That none of us are capable of rational thought? They ignore the investigations that we do try to undertake to inform ourselves and ridicule us when we ask for further information as the ‘Disneyfied” versions of their account of their research isn’t adequate. I suggest, based on first hand experience, they don’t look for us, or listen when we try to speak. I’m not actually an immunisation denier but certainly am immunisation worried. For good reason – my son would have been 20 years old today, but didn’t make it past two weeks after immunisation. Two other children developed interesting deficits in functioning within weeks of immunisation. The children not immunized had no such events in their lives. The bottom line is the research is limited, they are too arrogant to record let along investigate concerns of many parents, they don’t do studies that effectively consider the impact of immunisation when given to children with other conditions (co-morbidity studies), don’t record anything other than a very limited type of reactions within an extreme limited time after immunisation period. IF they’re too arrogant to listen, and to work collaboratively, they don’t have a right to then turn around and wonder why people don’t trust their limited, paternalistic attitude and arrogant supposed scientific methods.

You mentioned that they only record “limited types of reactions within a limited time frame” after vaccination. What sorts of reactions do you think should be included and how long of a time frame do you think is reasonable to attribute a “reaction” to vaccination?

I believe that we need to rethink how we look at the debate. Immunization is only one factor that may or may not impact on child development. At this stage there is not effective data systems that allow scientists to explore possible impacts on child development. There should be systems of recording for any adverse change in child functioning at any age. With flagging systems for a range of events such as immunisation, domestic violence, etc. However only focussing on immunisation is too narrow for data collection purposes and will never allow scientists to get to the bottom of comorbidity issues. The new areas of factors such as toxic stress show that there is much that is not known about how external factors such as immunisation, stress, etc, etc,etc impact on child development. However if the data is collected and stored as new information comes to light scientists are able to re-interrogate the data and undertake effective correlational studies.. At the moment I know of 100s of parents of children who have either died or who are disabled, who are not ‘the evil and ridiculed
immunisation deniers’, that believe that their situation has not been even considered, let alone recorded and further examined by scientists. Across Westernised countries where this form of data collection is possible, I imagine there would be millions of parents concerned. There needs to be effective and broad data collection that is made readily available to ‘appropriately skilled’ and ethically approved (standard scientific practice) across a range of areas. Given that some countries are setting up large scale data collection process, such as Canada’s child protection/welfare data base, this type of collection is possible.. However, this data needs to be made available to a range of research interests and not just those purchased by companies with a financial interests. We are learning more and more about child development and factors that impact development. I believe with that, that scientists should be encouraged to re-interrogate data to look for co-morbidity factors to further inform specific research projects. The data that they are currently basing their findings on is not accurate, until it is, we can not trust the science. It is akin to someone telling me that no cars broke down today, because they are relying on the reports of someone who was out to lunch when they were supposed to be recording the stats.

“my son would have been 20 years old today, but didn’t make it past two weeks after immunisation. Two other children developed interesting deficits in functioning within weeks of immunisation. The children not immunized had no such events in their lives. ”

I’m sorry for your loss; however, this isn’t much to go on. Three children out of how many immunized? Versus how many not immunized? This is purely anecdotal.

If you were to take your car in to have an oil change, and two days later your power steering seized, is that the result of the oil change, or coincidence?

well in my situation that’s 3 out of 3. So 100 percent of children immunized showing a negative response. Fairly conclusive if you’re going to play with numbers. And 2 out of 2, 100 percent of my children that didn’t have immunization with no adverse reaction shown. But you’ve also missed the point. Parents of children who have experienced adverse events from something (may or may not be immunisation) are saying they are not heard, their situation not recorded and sent onto scientists, so how can the research be accurate? It can’t because the data never gets to the researchers for analysis.

On my first read, I didn’t realize that all the children you referred to were your own. That definitely does sound suspicious, and would incline me to think that there may be something more going on than just coincidence. There definitely should have been some kind of investigation to see if there was a common cause and if, as you suspect, that cause was the vaccine.

You are absolutely correct in your posts here and below that there is room for improved collection of data – and we need less skepticism from medical staff; too many downplay issues and ignore patients’ genuine concerns (I spent six months trying to tell my doctor there was more wrong with me than a virus I couldn’t shake; turned out my problem was diabetes).

That said, I am still very much a supporter of vaccinations. There are practically no medications or medical procedures that do not pose a risk to some portion of the population. The benefits to societal health have been enormous. It would be great, though, if we could figure out ways to better determine who may be among the small percentage of the population for whom adverse effects would be more likely.

The real test will come when the HIV vaccine which is in human trials now is licenced and Bill Gates starts immunizing everyone in developing countries. Will this anti-vaccination people REALLY not immunize their chlidren against HIV/AIDS? It is one thing to ignore diseases that are very rare in North America (Polio, Diptheria, Measles) and what is seen to be benign childhood illnesses (Chicken Pox). It is another thing to ignore an illness that has had a huge impact on our culture.

The same pharmecutical companies that make the vaccine are the same company that tells you that you need the vaccine……..remember they make billions of dollars of the vaccines ..and most politicians have stocks within these companies so they tell you need it when you actually don’t
Th

Why do they force healthcare workers to take the vaccine? If it was something good to take, healthcare workers could take it without being forced to. More than the half of healthcare workers don’t like it.

Why do they force healthcare workers do take it? Well, they don’t force ALL healthcare workers to take it. Infact, it really is the choice of the healthcare worker. However, if there is an outbreak and you refused to take the vaccine, which is your right, you go home with no pay (which is an agreement the union has made with the employer). Now, you as a family member or ill person in the hospital tell me how you would feel if you had cancer and a compromised immune system and I as a healthcare worker gave you a virus I could have been vaccinated for but refused. You are not strong enough to fight it and die. How would your family feel? What if it was your child who I made sick? As a healthcare worker, I made a choice to work among sick people and I made an agreement to make decisions based on science and on what is best for my patients. When the H1N1 flu broke out, physicians lined up in droves to be imunized. They didn’t want to take that virus home to their families. If less educated healthcare workers didn’t get vaccinated, that was due to their own ignorance. I don’t think they had any idea that they would be sent home without pay if there was an epidemic.

Norwegian authorities imported 3 doses of Pandemrix vaccine for every single inhabitant of Norway. As it appears, lucky for Norwegian authorities, they managed to convince only 50% of parents to vaccinate their kids.

Norway:

470 000 kids age 4-19 years received Pandemrix. ( 50% of population )

Vaccinated: 35 diagnosed with narcolepsy.

Unvaccinated: 4 cases

35:4 = 9 Vaccinated kids were 9 times as likely to be diagnosed with narcolepsy = strong association.

32 deaths were associated with H1N1 virus from the summer 2009 until spring 2010. That is actually less then the usual number of people who die of flu during any previous flu season in Norway.

Studies in other Nordic countries have shown that the swine flu vaccine Pandemrix can cause narcolepsy if it is given to children.Now, three children have been granted compensation by the Norwegian Patients Compensation authority (NPE) after being vaccinated. NPE concluded that there was a causal link between children’s narcolepsy condition and the use of the vaccine.

The amount of compensation is uncertain
The three children who now have been granted compensation is probably affected by the state on a permanent basis. It may therefore be talking about millions in compensation to each child. NPE follows conventional tort calculation rules. Herein Among the rules that one should be replaced with future loss of income and benefits to aid in the home beyond the municipality can offer. Read more about the replacement of personal items here.
Probably many more who are entitled to compensation
Around 2.2 million people could be vaccinated during the swine flu epidemic.Over half a million of them were children. There are probably many who have not yet reported their claims to the NPE.

Notice: Your email may not yet have been verified. Please check your email, click the link to verify your address, and then submit your comment. If you can't find this email, access your profile editor to re-send the confirmation email. You must have a verified email to submit a comment. Once you have done so, check again.

Sign In / Sign Up

With your existing account from

With an email account

Commenters who signed up before June 26th, 2014 will have to reregister on our new, social-friendly login system. The good news? The process should only take a few minutes, and you're welcome to use the same email address.

Almost Done!

Please confirm the information below before signing up.

{* #socialRegistrationForm *}
{* socialRegistration_firstName *}
{* socialRegistration_lastName *}
{* socialRegistration_emailAddress *}
{* socialRegistration_displayName *}
By clicking "Create Account", I confirm that I have read and understood each of the website terms of service and privacy policy and that I agree to be bound by them.